Jump to content

Idle thinkings on BattleTech


Roy_The_Ruthles

Recommended Posts

I was reading some of the battletech novels recently and of course my mind thinks this would be a great thing to play. I've never played any of the battletech games or MechWarrior games, so hopefully more knowledgeable people will correct my mistakes (sorry about the ones in spelling, i know I know)

 

First I was thinking about if i wanted to build the mech's as characters or as vehicles. I realized both ways had distinct advantages, and distinct disadvantages.

 

If I built them as vehicles, it would be easy to size them (just give them the size penalty appropriate to the tonnage), but this would lead to low DCVs relative to the OCVs of the mech, (and I can't imagine mechs having very high DEX, because they are agile for their size, but they are big).

 

My solution to this might be to impose an OCV penalty to weapons, because at least in the novels people miss a lot, and that wouldn’t' happen as much with the size penalty to DCV.

 

2ndly the vehicle rules don't take stun and I’m a huge fan of stun. So i here's my thoughts on treating them like characters...

 

As a character, they would take stun, which would represent connections coming lose, wiring shorting out, and other less vital components shaking lose. To represent HEAT, I figured most things that generate HEAT also cost END (attacking, and moving come to mind), so just rename END to COLD and as mechs use END (COLD) they become hotter. Then give a physical limitation to represent when they are out of COLD they cannot perform actions that would use COLD. Plus then mechs could take REC, which would represent standing still as the pilot rewires systems through unbroken paths. They could be stunned, by being knocked off balance or something.

 

Then mechs would have to have huge BODY, CON, STR etc relative to the characters, but that shouldn’t be a huge problem, because as I understand, few ground forces are a threat to mechs, with the exceptions being tanks and planes, and elementals. Mechs could have a natural 25%-50% (depending if clan or inner sphere) Damage Reduction that applies before armor (I know it doesn’t work like that normally but bear with me). This would allow a rifle to be 1.5-2d6 or what ever and be a credible threat to a pilot, but once he jumps in his mech, the gun drops to having 1d6 damage, which would ping off the mech(and allows the mech to be nearly invulnerable to small arms fire). This would be done with a (-1) limitation “not very effective against mechsâ€. Then give tanks and other things that are supposed to hurt mechs weapons that do not have this limitation.

 

Using costs extra END limitations allows some weapons (like PPC) to use COLD quickly, and maybe even a drain COLD effect attached to some weapons (like flamethrowers).

 

I like the idea of using DR and building mechs as a character also because then they would have OCV and DCV close together, and then give a physical limitation like “mech†which comes into play against non-mech targets, applying DCV penalties and bonuses to PER to spot it, etc.

 

Also then using char rules, I can use hit locations to have critical hits etc. Add in impairing and disabling wounds to allow arms and legs to be destroyed.

 

Does anyone have any ideas on this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Idle thinkings on BattleTech

 

I've played in Battletech campaigns using a variety of systems - Mechwarrior, Shadowrun, HERO, Star Frontiers.

 

Really, I think the best way to do it would be to use HERO for the out of cockpit stuff, and anything that Battletech rules cover (ie mostly mech combat) - just use the Battletech rules. That's what we've always done, and it works out fine.

 

Then just need to decide how you want the interactions to work. What HERO "Combat Pilot: Battlemech" rolls translate to what Mech Pilot roll in Battletech, if a pilot knowing martial arts will have an effect on mech combat, etc.

 

For us, a good part of the fun was "getting to play Battletech" as part of the larger campaign. If it was all HERO, I don't think it would be as much fun for us. YMMV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Idle thinkings on BattleTech

 

i agree on using BT for all the in cockpit stuff, and Hero for everything out of cockpit, various attempts at mech conversion have been done here on the boards, the biggest problem is heat management, sensors and weapons and movement are a breeze

 

we've statted out a few mechs and if somebody has requests, I could do a few more, the only real reason to do full stats would be figuring character point costs, course you could use the art for the mech and the fluff text to give them limits and disads to cut the costs down for hte players

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Idle thinkings on BattleTech

 

If I built them as vehicles, it would be easy to size them (just give them the size penalty appropriate to the tonnage), but this would lead to low DCVs relative to the OCVs of the mech, (and I can't imagine mechs having very high DEX, because they are agile for their size, but they are big).

 

My solution to this might be to impose an OCV penalty to weapons, because at least in the novels people miss a lot, and that wouldn’t' happen as much with the size penalty to DCV.

You could do what I always do with differently-sized combatants - subtract DCV modifiers.

 

1) Mech A has -4 DCV. Mech B has -4 DCV. When they fight, neither has a DCV penalty (-4 - -4 = 0).

 

2) Mech A has -4 DCV. Mech B has -7 DCV. The difference is -7 - -4 = -3. When they fight, Mech A has normal DCV and Mech B has -3 DCV.

 

3) Mech A has -7 DCV. Mech B has -7 DCV. When they fight, neither has a DCV penalty (-7 - -7 = 0).

 

It has its advantages and disadvantages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Idle thinkings on BattleTech

 

Also keep your range modifiers in mind. Vehicles that size aren't ever going to be within two hexes of each other, unless it's by accident or they're going hand-to-hand. Engagement ranges would typically be measured in the hundreds of yards/meters, I would imagine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Idle thinkings on BattleTech

 

You're right. Typical BTech combat range was about 9-12 BTech hexes, which translates to 270-360 meters.

 

You could possibly use abstracts and just give normal stats to the mechs and do combat with hexes that are just bigger. But you might run into problems if a mech wants to shoot at a normal person. Bah, just use BTech for the mech stuff and HERO for everything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Idle thinkings on BattleTech

 

Well this is one where I am accually a bigger fan of a Non-hero game. I have come to really enjoy Battle Tech the role playing game and how it is set up. Even though it lacks some of the "options" that hero provides it still is a point based game and that is the real draw of it for me. Also since all at the rules are there JUST USE THEM. Of corse if you are insistant on trying to plot hero starts to mech warrior you are going to run into a lot of problems.

 

I like Fred but I Love Giant Mecha more.

PS. Go Stiener, and the eternal phyco b**** Katrina Stiener-Davion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Idle thinkings on BattleTech

 

Since I don't have firsthand experience with either Battletech or Mechwarrior, I'll just direct you to the HERO conversion work that's already been done for it:

 

Character conversion notes:

http://herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20856

 

Mech conversion suggestions and notes:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15903

 

Mech design guidelines, and writeup for Elemental Armor:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18441

 

Heat sinks:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16364

 

Writeups for sensor arrays:

http://www.starherofandom.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=65&sid=11a0a3ad296a8df9d79ba05dda9ca32d

 

Writeups for weapons:

http://www.starherofandom.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=66&sid=11a0a3ad296a8df9d79ba05dda9ca32d

 

More weapons, and other gear:

http://www.starherofandom.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=64&sid=11a0a3ad296a8df9d79ba05dda9ca32d

 

The following links are to writeups of various Battlemechs.

 

Atlas:

http://herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=32231

 

Awesome:

http://www.starherofandom.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=56&sid=11a0a3ad296a8df9d79ba05dda9ca32d

 

Highlander:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16434

 

Locust:

http://www.starherofandom.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=55&sid=11a0a3ad296a8df9d79ba05dda9ca32d

 

Warhammer:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16308

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Idle thinkings on BattleTech

 

Honestly the reason to use HERO is because i already own it and the reason to not use battlemech is because i'm cheap' date=' is everyone happy?:P[/quote']

 

Ah...also missed this part from the OP

 

I've never played any of the battletech games or MechWarrior games

 

So, if you've never played Battletech and don't have any of the stuff...yeah, might not be as good to try to use B-tech rules. :P If your players also don't expect stuff to be like the boardgame (either never played, or you make it clear to them) all good. Play a HERO mecha game set in the Battletech universe, not an attempt at "accurate" conversion from the base stats, and should work out. :)

 

Despite the mechs being vehicles, I'd probably overall try to build them and treat them like characters for movement/combat...vehicles are one of the areas where HERO isn't as good as it could be, and making that part of the rules a central part of a campaign...:help: Come up with some "internal damage" tables and the like for when they take Body to reflect weapon/sensor/etc damage to allow for some gradual degrading of effectiveness instead of 100% vs. destroyed as only options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Idle thinkings on BattleTech

 

Ok. Something you might find as a Good Idea then would be to build the Mechas as Atamatons. That way you could call them V. for practical purposes and still get some effects only linked to Vehicles and Aut, Like Doesn't take Stun. I know you said earlier that you wanted to use stun as a way of showing interal systems not working properly but I think if you just stick with DTS it would be better in the end. Also use the Hit location table and make sure to in your head at least "plot out ammo paths and weapon locations." I say this becuase even though the mech might not take stun he will have to "lose powers or abilities" due to the DTS attribute. So it would make sense that if he takes a giant PPC shot to the right arm that he lose use of a weapon or two there:ugly: . Also use the DCV to OCV concept that Austenandrews mentioned earlier. It is a real *Nifty*:thumbup: idea.

 

 

Also build in a End reserve with multiple disades representing how much End has been used( or lost ) in one Segement and have it automatically cuase problems with Movement/targeting/ect, and that could represent Heat management. Also make sure that it has a sutable End reserve Recov, becuase most mechs that were Poperly designed could discharge most weapons without worry of heat and could vent out most there built up heat in two orders or so. Also make sure that all onboard equipment uses end only from the End Reserv that way if they use it all up(over heat) they can't draw from anything else.

 

La Rose(Hero) Dostaglou(mech warrior RPG) SouGen (Clicky Tech) if you have any questions that are specific to mech warrior universe, weather it be current wizkids or clasic FASA I would be glad to help. :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Idle thinkings on BattleTech

 

I'm surprised QM hasn't chimed in with his master list. Anyway.

 

Battletech is a remarkably well developed world, and I myself and a proponent of Giant Robots (note the avatar & tag). I asked some similar questions.

 

If you want to build Giant Robots and use the HERO system to do it, you need to pick up a copy of Robot Warriors - you can get it in PDF, or find it online with some searching. I got mine from Noble Knight Games. Then, Google "Chris Goodwin Robot Warrior" and get his conversion notes, that go from 3rd to 4th. I then made suggestions to him on how to go from 4th to 5th, but I don't know that he ever updated his site. Robot Warriors is NOT Battletech. It's very good, but it's not BT.

 

My suggestion? Same as what the others said, really. There's nothing wrong with playing straight Battletech; it's a good system and it's built to represent the world that it's in. Flip side of that coin, there's nothing wrong with hybridizing them, or just using BT as flavor material. Me? I'm a Battletech nut, so I've often considered going Hybrid as people suggest. I don't like MechWarrior. Clunkalicious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Idle thinkings on BattleTech

 

The Stinger, the Wasp, the Archer, the Ostoc, the Warhammer, the Marauder, all recognizable.

 

The thing I want to know is, where did the Locust come from? It's one of my favorite designs from an aesthetic point of view.

 

The Locust is a hunter-killer robot from a "Crusher Joe" anime, as are the Samurai and the Corsair aerospace fighters.

 

The Griffin, Shadowhawk, Thunderbolt, Battlemaster and Goliath are all from "Dougram: Fist of the Sun Fang".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Idle thinkings on BattleTech

 

Most Battletech mecha are original. Since the Harmony Gold fiasco (look up "Harmony Gold FASA" in Google and you'll see what I mean), they've made a concerted effort to delete all pictures of unoriginal designs and those designs contracted out to others (where the others retained the rights). Additionally, because they decided the art had to go, they removed the unoriginal mechs from the Technical Readouts and either replaced them with original mecha or cut the page count. Basically, FASA got very, very scared of lawsuits and the unoriginal stuff had to go.

 

In an effort to correct this state of affairs, FanPro (current Battletech producer licensing the rights from WizKids) released Technical Readout: Project Phoenix with changed art for versions of many of the original mechs released after 3062 (IIRC). Prior to 3062, the mechs look as they did before the art and their stats were deleted. Of course, if you don't have the older books or minis, then you don't know what they look like. You can find the art and stats online (and the stats in mech creation programs) if you care to look, but FanPro won't ever officially use their art again.

 

If you know anyone with the books, compare the list of mechs from the original Technical Readout: 3025 with the revised Technical Readout: 3025 to see what was deleted. Other Technical Readouts that were impacted include 3050 and 3055. For this reason, older versions tend to command higher prices.

 

I wouldn't invest in Battletech right now, though, since new rules are coming out over the convention season (maybe Origins, but most likely GenCon). It'd be a shame to waste money with that on the horizon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Idle thinkings on BattleTech

 

Most Battletech mecha are original. Since the Harmony Gold fiasco (look up "Harmony Gold FASA" in Google and you'll see what I mean)' date=' they've made a concerted effort to delete all pictures of unoriginal designs and those designs contracted out to others (where the others retained the rights). Additionally, because they decided the art had to go, they removed the unoriginal mechs from the Technical Readouts and either replaced them with original mecha or cut the page count. Basically, FASA got very, very scared of lawsuits and the unoriginal stuff had to go.[/quote']

 

 

Now in FASA's defense. The designs that got them in the most trouble were original . And the company that sued them over the rights never one a single court case :eek:. Namely in japan you can own something and another company can own it too as long as they arn't a competetor in the same field. IE fasa made desings for RPG games and a minature game, the other company made them for retail sale that had nothing to due with FASA and wasn't competing in the same industry so, they owned the rights too. But they wanted to keep themselves from looking like idiots :doi: so they sued FASA and made it look like FASA stole all its designs. That was the big controversy that Sent them out of busines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...